obviously backward incompatible; nicer than const all over: shorter notation, say (=x, =y) => A*x + B*y + C
semantics based on which version of JS a feature was added bad as @domenic forcefully argued in SF
-
-
don't shift goalposts to "bad", admit it, your "invisible" was inaccurate.
-
of course I didn't mean to imply it wasn't speccable.
-
strict: function x() { new.target } function x(y=z) {} function x(...y) {} 1/
-
not: function x() { return {get y() {}} } function x(y) {} function x() { arguments } 2/2
-
super -> strict, function* -> strict. What about function() { yield } (still supported in FF)
-
if you want to make the discussion about the meaning of "invisible", I concede completely
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.